been changed. most dramatically with the use of the filibuster. the use of the filibuster, about 20 years ago when clinton came to office it kind of spiked. it's really spiked since 2009. this is taking a whole new direction. this is actually the third cabinet nominee that's been subjected to some kind of a filibuster, but the other two, one under reagan and one under bush, were totally symbolic. it was jesse helm that the cloture vote was 85-4. dirk kempthorn and bill nelson running -- >> i love when people name dirk kempthorn. >> this is -- i think the real dangerous precedent that's being set here, though, is let's say that this is partly lindsey graham posturing for 2014 in south carolina so he will eventually drop his objection and john mccain will go along. >> the mccain piece is interesting to me, though. a lot of people are saying watch where mccain goes. he has gone back and forth on this. an elder statesman of the senate who has respect for preer and the upper chamber. >> but he has such a strong personal relationship with lindsay graham, and lindsay graham is so personall

. >> but is that the new republican prescription for what ails us? >> i guess. i guess. i mean, keep it in perspective. the -- a lot of the things a president can do. his action is limited in a lot of these spheres. for example, in giving benefits to same-sex partners. there's a defense of marriage act, and that's -- so that's congress's domain. they get to say what is and what isn't, but the president does have some latitude, and, look, every congress complains about every president overreaching and being a dictator. >> maybe it seems like he is overreaching, jared, because they're not doing anything. >> right. >> it's kind of like there is no leway for not to be an overreaching, sfwler sum game. >> mode of operating is inaction, so action looks very suspicious. i thought that was a peculiar kind of quote because clearly if we were clues cruising along at full employment and everything was fine, perhaps inaction would be a reasonable path. we're not. we have lots of problems in this country, and immigration, guns, and the economy. let me say one thing about the economy. the kind of things we're going

then they would no longer have the republicans to blame. >> joining us now to discuss is telemundo jose diaz. it is always a good day when you are on my screen. >> jose, there's been a lot of negative reaction from certain corners in the gop on this white house sort of floated proposal. to me -- i would love you to correct or build on this, but the machine here -- the numbers are eight years as the length of time we need to travel on path to citizenship. thus far weave heard sort of overtures made around citizenship, but to actually peg a number to it would seem to put the gop in a fairly difficult place given the fact that they sort of danced around that topic to agree sense they've been talking about immigration reform. >>. >>ist eight years, five years, or 15 years. the reality of the matter is that there is very difficult work being done both in the senate and the house between republicans and democrats to try and get some kind of agreement that would lead to 11 million people finally being able to come out from under the shadows and our borders to be secure. yesterday on enfoque senator

Excerpts 0 to 3 of about 4 results.